A Fresno
Superior Court judge abused his authority by ordering an acquaintance facing a
domestic violence charge released on his own recognizance, in violation of
statute, the Commission on Judicial Performance has alleged.

Judge James M.
Petrucelli, who has been on the bench since 1999 and been disciplined by the
commission on at least three prior occasions, violated numerous provisions of
the Code of Judicial Ethics in his handling of the release of Jay Ghazal last
year, the commission said in a notice of formal proceedings made public
yesterday.

The judge’s
lawyer, Kathleen Ewins, told the Fresno Bee in an email that Petrucelli “admits
that he made a mistake and is willing to accept discipline short of the loss of
his job.” The attorney said she was confident the special masters who will hear
evidence in the case “will recognize that Judge Petrucelli did not engage in
willful misconduct, and that he should not be removed from office.”

The commission
alleges that Petrucelli acted in response to a text message from Jonathan
Netzer, a Fresno personal injury attorney. Netzer, Ghazal, and Petrucelli, the
commission charged, all know each other and attend events organized by a local
cigar store, as well as a monthly cigars-and-barbeque event organized by the
attorney.

After speaking to
Netzer by phone, Petrucelli called the jail and told personnel to release
Ghazal on his own recognizance. He did so, the commission said, contrary to
Penal Code §1270, which says that a defendant charged with any of the specified
crimes, including spousal abuse, shall not be released OR except following a
hearing in open court, with two days’ notice to the prosecution.

It was, the
commission, said, also unethical for Petrucelli to intercede in a case
involving social acquaintances.

“The matter of
Mr. Ghazal’s release was not properly before you, and you would have been
disqualified had the matter come before you in the ordinary course of judicial
business because of your relationship with both Mr. Ghazal and Mr. Netzer.”

The commission
also charged Petrucelli with having an improper communication with Ghazal at a
fundraiser after his release. The notice of proceedings says Petrucelli told
Ghazal “to stay away from his wife,” and that Ghazal then asked Petrucelli for
advice about a lawyer.

Two days later,
Petrucelli called a lawyer on Ghazal’s behalf, then told Ghazal to call the
lawyer, the commission says.

Petrucelli’s
conduct violated ethical rules requiring judges to uphold the integrity of the
judiciary; avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety; refrain from
using judicial office to benefit friends, relatives, and acquaintances and from
creating the appearance that the judge is susceptible to outside influence;
refrain from using the office to advance private interests; be faithful to the
law; avoid improper ex parte communications; and to avoid conflicts of
interest, the commission said.

Petrucelli was a
sheriff’s deputy for 15 years and a civil lawyer for nine years before he was
elected to the bench in 1998. In an email to the Bee yesterday, he expressed
regret for making the call to the jail “without knowing the precise nature of
the charges against his acquaintance, and without fully thinking through the
issues,” the newspaper reported on its website.

He also said
that when he was a deputy sheriff, judges would “from time to time” call the
jail and ask that individuals be released on their own recognizance.

Petrucelli was
publicly admonished by the CJP in 2007 for making discourteous and sarcastic
remarks from the bench, both to attorneys and to individuals appearing before
him. The commission cited 10 incidents between 2002 and 2006, six of which
occurred while Petrucelli was handling family law cases and the remainder
during his subsequent assignment to traffic court in Coalinga.

At the time of
the admonishment, the commission disclosed that the judge received private
discipline for similar misconduct in 2001 and 2002.